People v. Gardner
2 Johns. 477
Opinion
We are of opinion, that the prisoner cannot be tried for this offence in this state. When the original taking is out of the jurisdiction of this state, the offence does not continue and accompany the possession of the thing stolen, as it does in the case where a thing is stolen in one county, and the thief is found with the property in another county.
See contra, Tyng's Rep. (Mass.) v. 2. p. 14. the Commonwealth v. Andrews.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Gardner, 2 Johns. 477 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1807).
2 Johns. 477 (People v. Gardner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Carter
26 N.Y. Crim. 211 (New York County Courts, 1911)
Brown v. United States
35 App. D.C. 548 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1910)
State v. Kief
15 L.R.A. 722 (Montana Supreme Court, 1892)
Stanley v. State
24 Ohio St. (N.S.) 166 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1873)
People ex rel. Trombley v. Humphrey
23 Mich. 471 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1871)
People v. Loughridge
1 Neb. 11 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1871)
W. R. H. Gause v. Richardson, Sheriff
9 Del. 222 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1870)
State v. Bennett
14 Iowa 479 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1863)
Haskins v. . the People
16 N.Y. 344 (New York Court of Appeals, 1857)
Commonwealth v. Uprichard
69 Mass. 434 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1855)
Hamilton v. State
11 Ohio St. 435 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1842)
Simmons v. Commonwealth
5 Binn. 617 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1813)
Sturgenegger v. Taylor
5 S.C.L. 7 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1811)